While only in the Ural region, but the decision of the Arbitration Court of Sverdlovsk region could eventually disrupt orderly system balances between contract and prepaid-rates in the birthplace of the largest federal operator. Uraltel providing mobile services under the brand name of MTS since 2004, administratively liable for the illegal fines from their subscribers. Decision of Deputy Head of TU Rospotrebnadzor is recognized by law, and citizens are requested to pay a fine for breach of contract with MTS. And if the fine is paid - to demand the return of the amount paid.
It is a federal program for MTS 15% discount on local and mobile calls. Since April last year contracted rates MTS subscribers are invited to enjoy 15 percent discount on telecommunications services in exchange for a guaranteed loyalty to the beloved operator. Apparently, the idea of the whole "work", but not quite lived up to expectations and after 5 months has been supplemented and extended action "choose your half." Discount of 50% superficially looked very impressive and really "touch up" the existing contract to TA level prevailing at the time mid-market realities. When the subscriber signs a contract that read the "Terms 15% discount on local and mobile calls to and from that moment becomes a loyal customer of MTS at least a year. Of course, no power is forcing the subscriber to sign such a commitment, many people do not sign up. Still a certain amount of meticulous users subsequently carefully dodging the possible penalties by switching to cheaper TA and podkarmlivaniya "phone lowest possible amounts. Which, of course, does not solve the problem of preservation facilities. Certain group of people just "gets on the money: discount look enticing, but several pages of rather complicated explanations are reading is not all.
Serfdom in Russia abolished the century before last, so even terminate a contract with the feudal ... sorry, a federal operator is still possible. But only for money, often considerable: the amount of fines can range from 40 to 650 dollars, excluding VAT. It is these penalty payments received numerous complaints of "infidels" of subscribers and the subsequent trial Rospotrebnadzor Sverdlovsk region.
The essence and origin of the notorious program discount in exchange for loyalty "is quite understandable. The Company maintains an aggressive marketing policy to attract new subscribers by offering a variety of gifts, "Vadim" ("$ 10 is not too much!") And selling through dealers new contracts "Jeans for a third of the price balance. Let us not forget the annual initiative "Summer Jeans, putting the contract subscribers in frankly a disadvantage. Let not the whole year, but a few months - is also rather big term.Accordingly, the operator has to build a system of counterweights: the race for the new connections do not lose mass appeal of prepaid-rate and at the same time to "fix" of existing subscribers, not to allow them to more attractive perebeganiya "Jeans". In the impossibility to carry out a phone number to another operator discounts and penalties as an effective deterrent, since the payment of the penalty nullifies the potential savings from switching to another tariff. In the case of forced (court decision) the abolition of the existing scheme operator will seek other, more market-based ways to keep their networks lucrative contract subscribers.
In this tangled case of MTS strongly disagree with the term "fine" and insisted on the phrase "one-time cash payment." In principle, it is logical, but punished the ruble a little worried about consumer legal terms. In the end, and a fine for free luggage trolley can be called a "lump-sum payment for violation of right of way." The difference is that, even after selling a ticket at a discount, the management of passenger transport does not penalize passengers for attempting to ride the shuttle bus.
Deserve special mention in the wording of the Terms of discounts. " Quote of the Sverdlovsk action: "<...> Terms of Service," 15% discount on local and mobile calls to "set out in such a way that after reading them it is not clear to subscribers that terminate the contract before the expiry of one year from the date of commencement of service provision, they must pay a fine. Consequently, ZAO Uraltel "violation of the rights of consumers to receive appropriate, providing an opportunity right choice of information about the service." Really complicated four-page document in which way and that are discussed / negotiated the notorious "one-off payments in the form of paragraphs, sub-paragraphs and footnotes Loved by an asterisk. Cut through all this verbal casuistry waiting dessert in the form of a paragraph with mathematical formulas and equations. With the current version of the Terms and Conditions are available at MTS, as a variant on the date of this publication is available here. We are far from thinking that all this was invented specifically to confuse the subscriber. Likely "would like better" (all thoroughly consider and explain), but it turned out "as always" (the decision of the arbitral tribunal).
Alexander Arutyunov, a lawyer ICA (Prince & Partners)
I believe that the conditions of collection of this penalty violates the rights of the consumer. The consumer has the right to terminate the contract at any time. In this case, the consumer's rights are infringed in some way and we can talk about what these additional conditions violate the "Law on Consumer Protection." Will the decision of the Sverdlovsk court made note of when considering similar claims? Likely to be. Yes, Russia no case law, but note it will be accepted. In addition, it is not even taking note of. For example, the Moscow Arbitration Court, and he will see that in fact there is an infringement of consumer rights and will take appropriate action.
Pavel Nefedov, Director of Public Relations, MTS
At present, the final decision on the dispute there, because we filed an appeal to the Arbitration Court of the Urals Federal District.Therefore, to make conclusions prematurely.
We would like to emphasize that the MTS does not restrict the legal rights of subscribers. A lump sum cash payment, referred to, is not fine, otherwise it would be contrary to Article 32 of the Federal Law "On Protection of Consumer Rights." MTS provides subscribers the opportunity to use the services of cellular communication at a discount. Discount is granted on certain conditions, in particular, if the subscriber orders the services of MTS on the chosen tariff plan for the year and timely pay for services rendered. Otherwise, the calculation of tariffs for services received is taken into account as a lump sum of money of constant value, as it is written in the Terms of discounts.
Terms of discounts published, contain extensive information about everyone, including the above-mentioned features of the provision of preferential tariffs, and by signing a statement the prescribed form, the subscriber agrees to these terms. Once again I draw your attention to the fact that the change in billing services provided communications in accordance with these Terms of discounts only at the will of the party and is not required for a contract for provision of mobile radiotelephone MTS.
We believe that the current contract at a discount, these conditions are spelled out clearly enough. We believe these conditions are fair and do not plan to change the text of the treaty. May be prepared by addition, which bears an explanatory nature, but no changes in terms of discounts.